Okay guys (and gals), I have a question about screen resolutions that has been bugging me for a while. The "normal" resolutions that can be selected in Windows (and that are advertised for monitors and video cards) are:

640x480
800x600
1024x768
1280x1024
1600x1200

The first three and the last one of those are all 4:3 aspect ratio, the same as standard TVs. Why, then, is 1280x1024 in there? That is the only one that isn't 4:3, and its actually higher resolution (so it should have been 'harder' to achieve with older computers) than 1280x960, which is the 4:3 equivalent. I personally use 1280x960, because of its aspect ratio and how that affects viewing TV on my computer. I've just been very curious to see if anyone knows why the "standard" is so strange? Also, as a side note, I currently use a GeForce4 MX440 video card, but I'm planning on going over to an ATI card soon. Is 1280x960 still going to be an available option with ATI's drivers?

MSI K7N2-Delta
Athlon XP 2500+
2x512MB Kingston PC-3200
GeForce4 MX440-8X 64MB
SB Live! 5.1
MSI TV@nywhere Master
WD 160GB 7200rpm HDD
LiteOn 52x CD-RW
LiteOn 16x DVD

I'm running an ATI 9200 at 1280 x 960 using the drivers that came with the card.

I imagine it is for wide screen moniters, but then again what is 640x400 for?, just to allow 32bit colors on a 1mb video card (S3 Trio 64 V+ (765))

Most of the time you see what appears to be odd resolutions they are Mac resolutions. For instance 1152 x 864 is a Mac resolution that many monitors and vid cards will support.

Okay, thanks guys. Maybe I'll check into that Mac connection - if curiosity gets the better of me. And thanks for the confirmation on resolution availability, OtheHill.

MSI K7N2-Delta
Athlon XP 2500+
2x512MB Kingston PC-3200
GeForce4 MX440-8X 64MB
SB Live! 5.1
MSI TV@nywhere Master
WD 160GB 7200rpm HDD
LiteOn 52x CD-RW
LiteOn 16x DVD

You are welcome.